Multilevel Building Detection Framework in Remote Sensing Images Based on Convolutional Neural Networks
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In this paper, we propose a hierarchical building detection framework based on deep learning model, which focuses on accurately detecting buildings from remote sensing images. To this end, we first construct the generation model of the multilevel training samples using the Gaussian pyramid technique to learn the features of building objects at different scales and spatial resolutions. Then, the building region proposal networks are put forward to quickly extract candidate building regions, thereby increasing the efficiency of the building object detection. Based on the candidate building regions, we establish the multilevel building detection model using the convolutional neural networks (CNNs), from which the generic image features of each building region proposal are calculated. Finally, the obtained features are provided as inputs for training CNNs model, and the learned model is further applied to test images for the detection of unknown buildings. Various experiments using the Datasets I and II (in Section V-A) show that the proposed framework increases the mean average precision values of building detection by 3.63%, 3.85%, and 3.77%, compared with the state-of-the-art methods, i.e., Method IV. Besides, the proposed method is robust to the buildings having different spatial textures and types.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".